HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF INDIA’S TERRITORIAL EVOLUTION AND PARLIAMENTS AUTHORITY IN STATE REORGANISATION

Introduction

India is the world's largest democracy, described as a 'Union of States' in Article 1(1) of the Constitution. The country currently has 28 states and 8 Union territories, which was not the case in 1974. India is one of the oldest civilizations that over a period has evolved its structure to come from an ill-defined conglomeration of princely states and British colonies to the modern federal republic as of today. The evolution has also been characterized by territorial dynamics: the emergence, merging, and bifurcation of states has also been a major process underlying the country’s politics. Pivotal to this work has been the role of the Indian Parliament in the reorganization of states, a function that has often been embraced as well as resisted in the country in the seventy-seven years since its gaining freedom.

According to Article 1(3) of the Constitution, India's territory consists of states, Union Territories, and any other area acquired by the Indian government at any time. One of the most fascinating aspects of India's governance is the power vested in its Parliament to reorganize states, admit new states, and even cede territory. This blog post delves into the intricacies of these powers, their historical context, and their implications for India's territorial integrity and federal structure.

The Pre-Independence Landscape

To fully understand the complexity of territorial development in India, it is pertinent to look at the political map that preceded the formation of the country up to and including the year 1947. India was a group of British provinces in India and parts of the Indian subcontinent, there were princely states of different sizes and independence levels, and French and Portuguese colonies in India. Such a split political map proved to be a massive challenge to the emergent Indian state. The task of integrating such diverse provinces into a single nation-state is truly an impressive feat.

The Immediate Post-Independence Period (1947-1956)

The partition of India in the year 1947 is known to be the first demarcation of territories across the Indian subcontinent. The creation of Pakistan including the eastern wing (now known as Bangladesh) brought large-scale shifts in the demographic map and changes in boundaries. But more crucially, the process of bringing the princely states into the Indian Union was perhaps the biggest challenge for the new government.

It was Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel who, in his capacities as the first Home Minister and Minister of States, contributed most to the unification of the country. It meant that by 1949 almost all the major and minor kings had acceded to either the Indian Union through persuasion, or threat of use of force, or other such methods. Hyderabad was annexed in 1948 by Operation Polo, Junagadh was admitted only after taking a plebiscite and Kashmir is till date a disputed state. This period saw the emergence of the first demands for linguistic states, particularly in the south with the movement for a separate Andhra State for Telugu speakers.

The States Reorganization Act of 1956

Most notably, the Indian territorial formation delineates itself with ‘the States Reorganization Act of 1956’. This act redraws the map of the country on linguistic basis and formulated the suggestions given by the States Reorganization Commission. The first two significant accomplishments were establishing 14 states and 6 union territories The third major accomplishment was the restructuring of the boundaries within the states on the basis of linguistic and cultural similarities. This act showed the Indian Parliament’s desire to use its powers to drastically revise the internal map of India. It also established a pattern for subsequent reorganization on a linguistic, cultural, or administrative basis.

Constitutional Provisions and Parliamentary Authority

The founders of Indian Constitution anticipated the need for flexibility in territorial structure by providing provisions that allowed for the creation of new states as well as the modification of existing ones. The powers are primarily described in Articles 2, 3, and 4 of the Constitution. These provisions empower Parliament to admit new states to the Union of India, establish new states, amend the boundaries of existing states, and rename existing states. Article 2 permits parliament to pass legislation admitting or establishing new states into the union on whatever terms and conditions it deems appropriate.

Article 3 of the Constitution defines Parliament's authority to change states' physical structure and status. Parliament can make legislation to create a new state by removing a specific area from an existing state, merging two or more states or portions of states, or combining any territory with a part of any state. Parliament can also expand or decrease the size of any state, as well as change its borders or name. Explanation 2 of Article 3 clarifies that Parliament can also create a new state by combining a section of one state with another.

The power of parliament is both exclusive and plenary. That is why it has been stated that "India is an indestructible Union of destructible units".

In this regard, Parliament employs the following procedures.

Step 1: Either House of Parliament, on the President's proposal, may present a bill implementing any or all of the adjustments listed above.

Step 2: If a bill affects a state's boundary or name, the President shall refer it to the respective State Legislature before presenting it to Parliament for consideration.

Step 3: If the State Legislature does not express an opinion within that time frame, it will be deemed to have done so. The Parliament is not required to accept or act on the State Legislature's opinions, even if the State has submitted them within a certain time frame. In the case of Union Territories, it is not essential to seek the views of the respective legislatures; for example, bills relating to Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Daman, and Diu were introduced in Parliament without such views.

Article 3 highlights the vulnerability and dependency of the States' territorial integrity on the Union, unlike in federations such as the United States or Australia, the Federation cannot modify the borders or names of States without the States' assent.

Article 4 allows for changes to the First Schedule, which contains the names of Indian states, and the Fourth Schedule, which shows how many seats each state is entitled to in the Rajya Sabha. Parliament may also make whatever consequential, additional, and incidental legislation necessary to carry out the new measures. Any law established under Articles 2, 3, and 4 is not considered a constitutional amendment under Article 368. This means that a measure enacted by Parliament to reorganize the states is not unlawful, even if it violates any constitutional restrictions. Parliament thus has plenary and comprehensive powers to adopt legislation reorganizing the states and Union Territories and dealing with all problems – constitutional, legal, and administrative arising as a result thereof.

However, the powers granted to parliament to reorganize states cannot be utilized to cede any Indian territory to another country. Furthermore, Indian land can only be surrendered to a foreign country by a formal constitutional modification under Article 368 that modifies the First Schedule.

Major Reorganizations Post-1956

Since the 1956 Act, India has seen several significant state reorganizations:

1960: Bombay State split into Maharashtra and Gujarat
1963: Nagaland created from a part of Assam
1966: Haryana and Himachal Pradesh carved out of Punjab
1971: Manipur, Tripura, and Meghalaya became full-fledged states
1987: Goa achieved statehood; Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh became states
2000: Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, and Jharkhand created
2014: Telangana separated from Andhra Pradesh

Each of these reorganizations has its significance, often rooted in long-standing cultural, linguistic, or economic demands.

Challenges

While Parliament's control over state restructuring has allowed for greater flexibility in India's federal system, it has not come without problems and conflicts. The authority of the central government to change state boundaries has been viewed as an invasion of state autonomy. Critics contend that some reorganizations were motivated more by political considerations than administrative need or public demand. In addition, state division frequently results in disputes over natural resources, water sharing, and assets. While linguistic rearrangement was intended to alleviate identity-based disputes, it has in some cases worsened ethnic and sub-regional identities. The formation of new states frequently results in calls for future divisions, as evidenced by the continuous demands for states such as Vidarbha, Bodoland, and Gorkhaland.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is important to stress on India’s territorial history and the part of the Parliament in the states’ reorganization. This characteristic of Indian federalism has allowed India to redefine its internal physical boundaries as per changes in social, cultural, and political realities on the ground. It has contributed towards the management of diversity, meeting regional demands, and enhancing national integration.

But as India develops, it can’t be reorganized without proper caution and planning. Subsequent choices must find the right compromise between local claims and national imperatives, business and cultural requirements, as well as bureaucratic rationality and political order.

The capacity the Indian Parliament must alter pieces of the internal geographical landscape of India only proves how malleable the Indian Constitution truly is. It still stays the useful tool to negotiate regional disparities and aims. However, its judicious use will be crucial in ensuring that India's unity in diversity continues to thrive in the face of 21st-century challenges.

AUTHOR:

Chukki Anagha C

Alliance School of Law, Alliance University